Most homes are not in a physical situation to produce the 1750 kilowatt hours annually touted for the $7000 2 meter ball.  Let’s just say every spot in the US was, and every place paid 10 cents per kwh.  Both are off by about a factor of 2, but since this “energy ball” is a fantasy regarding energy solutions, let’s just go with it.  1750 kwh x $.10 is $175 a year; a 40 year payback, which is an unbelievably bad investment.  At 2005 electricity usage, we would have to build 2.18 BILLION of these, about 600 for every sq. mile in the US.  That includes all those wild places and national parks so precious to the greenies.  This just not an option as an investment or as a practical solution. Since the reality is that most of the country would produce about half that electricity, and much of the West and Alaska is so remote that we would never be able to get the electricity to where it is needed, and most electricity comes at nearer 5 cents per kwh (which doubles they payback time to 80 years!!!) it becomes even more apparent that this is closer to OZ than reality.

Reply to this: comment | thread